Contributing Reporter
A lawyer as well as a journalist, he has written about crime, criminal justice and legal affairs for Harper’s, The Atlantic, Slate, The Guardian and n+1. Prior to attending law school, he was an Associated Press reporter, with stints in the Oslo, Norway, and Providence, Rhode Island, bureaus.
Most rights are based in statute, but dozens — such as rights to same-***** marriage, search warrants and Miranda warnings — are based on judicial rulings that the Supreme Court can overturn and that current justices have questioned some aspect of.
President Joe Biden is expected to sign the legislation, whose Senate sponsors cited ProPublica’s reporting on McKinsey’s conflicts in working for both the FDA and opioid makers like Purdue Pharma.
Moore v. Harper could transform the law — but not in the way that many pundits, or even politicians, anticipate.
After overturning abortion rights and weakening gun controls, an overwhelmingly conservative court is set to consider vital matters involving elections, the environment and possibly the first prosecution of a U.S. president.
McKinsey consulted for the FDA without informing the agency of its work for opioid makers. Now lawmakers have introduced a bill to ensure federal contractors disclose conflicts of interest arising from private-sector work.
The consulting giant was helping Purdue Pharma and Johnson & Johnson fend off FDA regulations even as it helped shape FDA drug policy.
Civil asset forfeiture laws, which allow police to seize property without trial, are frequently justified as tools to seize millions from kingpins. A new study reveals the median amount taken is as low as $369 in some states.
State representatives in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona and Georgia could do the president’s bidding. But the political and legal obstacles are formidable.
La estrategia legal de Trump se ha reducido a esto: incluso cuando los jueces desestiman sus demandas por infundadas, presenta otras casi idénticas en nuevos tribunales, con la esperanza de encontrar jueces más favorables. El fracaso no lo ha frenado.
The Trump campaign’s legal strategy has come down to this: Even as judges dismiss lawsuits as baseless, it files nearly identical ones in new courts, hoping for more favorable judges. Failure has not slowed it down.
Es bastante fácil para la campaña de Trump demandar por irregularidades, pero es mucho más difícil presentar pruebas de irregularidades o un argumento jurídico convincente. Esto es lo que debe saber conforme comienzan a acumularse los litigios relacionados con las elecciones.
It’s easy enough for the Trump campaign to file a lawsuit claiming improprieties, but a lot harder to provide evidence of wrongdoing or a convincing legal argument. Here’s what you need to know as the election lawsuits start to mount.
Independientemente de quién gane la presidencia, las batallas en los tribunales parecen inevitables. A continuación, ofrecemos un panorama general de los estados y las leyes que pueden determinar el resultado.
Regardless of who wins the presidency, courtroom battles seem almost certain. Here’s a layperson’s look at the states and laws that may determine the outcome.
La decisión de la Corte Suprema que otorgó la elección de 2000 a George W. Bush no se considera en general un precedente, pero desde entonces ha sido citada en cientos de casos federales y estatales. Y también podría influir en las elecciones de este año.
The Supreme Court decision that handed the 2000 election to George W. Bush is widely believed not to be a precedent, yet it’s been cited in hundreds of federal and state cases since. It could play a role in this year’s election, too.
A committee chair is ratcheting up a fight over an investigation into potential conflicts of interests in the NLRB’s repeated efforts to undo an Obama-era rule that expanded liability for corporations like McDonald’s.
For the world’s best-known corporate-management consultants, helping tackle the pandemic has been a bonanza. It’s not clear what the government has gotten in return.
Celebrity prisoners like former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort have been granted home detention, but a secret Bureau of Prisons policy has kept all but 1.8% of federal inmates behind bars, where the virus rages.
A series of letters from detainees in one of America’s largest jails reveals the mounting dread and uncertainty as the coronavirus spreads inside the 7,500-inmate facility.
Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)
Thank you for your interest in republishing this story. You are are free to republish it so long as you do the following:
Copy and paste the following into your page to republish:
